-On [20030911 15:43], Tom Lane ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: >We can't ALTER a table that's already in use when the first ALTER >starts, either --- its attempt to exclusive-lock the table will fail. >But once you get the exclusive lock, you can (in Postgres) perform >a series of operations without fear that subsequently-started >transactions will be able to see the incompletely changed state of the >table. Evidently Oracle can't handle that. That's why they need to >invent combination operations like MODIFY CONSTRAINT.
As my colleague says: it is indeed a lazy choice, but super safe and that's the goal. -- Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(at)wxs.nl> / asmodai / kita no mono PGP fingerprint: 2D92 980E 45FE 2C28 9DB7 9D88 97E6 839B 2EAC 625B http://www.tendra.org/ | http://www.in-nomine.org/~asmodai/diary/ Man inagines that it is death he fears; but what he fears is the unforeseen, the explosion. What man fears is himself... ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
